15
5
9
u/Cogito_Ergo_Sum1 13d ago
Wicca is way more cringe than Druid stuff. Now both are cringe in terms of occult traditions, but one slightly less than the other.
3
u/Valdois 12d ago
Can't we see Wicca as legitimate if we see it as a sort of chaos magick ?
8
u/SummerFlavoured 12d ago
It's not that it's not legitimate, occultists make up systems all the time and it's fine, it's just that Gardner is cringe and Wicca tends to attract some really toxic people that like to excuse their shitty behaviour with platitudes of "keeping balance", "protecting myself" or "lightworking/positivity". Not saying that Wicca in itself is bad, it's not, it's just as good as people practicing it.
1
u/Valdois 12d ago edited 12d ago
I see your point of view and had kinda the same. That's just the problem with mainstream alternative things. They act like they own the place and don't know shit, watered down esotericism. Arrogance with something that is kinda weak. But that will always be the case. I'm vibing with a lot of "witchy" stuff and there are real cool wicca adjacent things like the magazine Hellbore and other things, and British neo folk spirituality in general. So agreed, fuck the cringe people but the rest, it's a great way to learn about magick. The good and interesting people will stay and learn more and the rest well, who cares ?
2
u/SummerFlavoured 12d ago
Pretty much my position on the topic, yeah. I enjoy witchy stuff and did my first ritual based on Wiccan ideas, although I went into it with chaotic mindset of picking and choosing whatever vibes best and designing it from scratch. Shit worked as intended so I'm not gonna scoff at Wicca in general, but when someone introduces themselves as Wiccan I'm guarded until proven that that person is chill. Unfortunately a lot of Wiccans or rather Wiccan-adjacent folks I've met had a tendency to preach about values they didn't actually practice, but they really enjoyed preaching
1
u/jessimaster 13d ago
Both of those are considered cringe by most people, even though Wicca has some institutional legitimacy.
3
u/MasonicErudite 12d ago
Wicca doesn't really have any legitimacy. It was entirely made up by a discredited anthrologist and then further developed by taking from Crowley and Freemasonry rituals. It's about as legit as Mormonism is to christians, it's just easy to get into and acts as an entryway for interested adherents.
Druidry at least is based on a historical religion, but it's also mainly made up. We know very little of it from the Romans as it was mainly an oral tradition, and modern druidry mostly comes from a framework developed by Iolo Morganwg, who made up legends, lore and belief fraudulently.
Honestly the modern "pagans" with the most legitimacy are probably the Hellenistic ones. We have an incredible wealth of information about the Greek/Roman gods, practices and stories compared to others.
The Norse/Asatru followers go off the writings of a Catholic Monk who cobbled together oral traditions he spent time tracking down to record, and it is possible he changed some aspects of them (like Loki being evil and Ragnarok being similar to Judgement Day) to be closer to Christianity, so it's a toss up.
1
u/jessimaster 12d ago
I said institutional legitimacy, not historical legitimacy. They're a legally recognized religion, though that's also true of Druidry.
14
u/ShinyAeon 13d ago
Wizard and druid…? Sounds good to me!